Comments on: Replacement ref: We were pawns in a business dealhttp://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/
ProFootballTalk on NBCSports.comFri, 09 Dec 2016 15:43:22 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.com/By: clrkcmhttp://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2044538
Fri, 05 Oct 2012 23:40:27 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2044538they gave a great effort got overwhelmed at times and allowed us fans to enjoy football glad the regular refs are back
]]>By: pappichttp://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2044498
Fri, 05 Oct 2012 23:11:57 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2044498Has anyone thought of the idea that these “replacement” refs are still refs….regardless of where they come from, they are refs…..and sometimes bad calls and mistakes could happen if these refs stuck together. As in all for one, if we do a bad job, fans and teams will complain and work out a deal to get our brother refs back at the deal they wanted….and thats what happened.
]]>By: ytownjoehttp://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2032801
Sun, 30 Sep 2012 00:58:20 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2032801The NFL was the laughingstock of professional sports. Television shows, morning, noon and night had a good time poking fun at the NFL. Even the women’s gossip show, The View, seemed bewildered about it.
Thee non-sports world thanks the NFL for all the laughs.
]]>By: allidoiswin55http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2032681
Sat, 29 Sep 2012 21:30:20 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2032681Joint Possession is fulfilled by the Tate/ Jennings play.. A Rational person tells you its an interception. However with all the Bashing of a team, refs, an coaches by the media.. There are people like myself that go to look (OBJECTIVELY) at the video evidence frame by frame. And upon futher review you call all but TOTALLY DISREGARD.. an INT being called…
Its almost impossible to prove a INT with real hard evidence and with the ways the rules have been written becuase of the grey area between the definitions of Control & Possession! According to the rules.. Its a CATCH and therefore a SEA Touchdown!!!

Thats the purpose for my original post on here. Ill stop and “take my tainted victory” when people remove their heads from there a** and realize it called right! my eyes tell me INT.. the Media and every other biased outlet says the same.. But the facts show different.. To be unable to see this and simply proclaim the call as 100% inaccurate is beyond stupid!

They put the replacement refs in a terrible situation.. Hard enough to do your job.. Their Integrety, personal lives, and careers were all questioned becuase of this. I mean people accusing them of cheating with Vegas.. Come on get real!
The replacement refs were NFL puppets all along and in one of the worst positions becuase of how easily you could point the finger! Referees have a hard enough job yet alone the media jumping all over every single error in a game. It was better TV to call out the refs. At first they were defending the replacements.. That equated to NO EXTRA viewings.. But the moment they switched there stance.. BOOM… Mobb style media, feeding people what they want to hear, building drama, all the articles all the TV shows..then you put a call that was made on MNF.. and about 90% of people believe it was an INT (Me included while watching) and the Sh*t storm goes crazy! Even the President comments on a football play!!!
The reg refs come back and now bad calls **Have magically never been made before, no games won or lost based on a call, all is forgiven between players and refs** Thats quite literally the dumbest thing I have ever heard and to not see that is pathetic!. As if bad calls dont happen in football on a more regular basis than any other professional sport. No matter the REFS! The whole idea of “I think we should take a knee..” Go ahead, but you better donote your checks refund all ticket costs and even cable costs then fools. A bad call made effects outcomes, but they regularly happen. On Monday you benefited from quite a few and lost to a couple! Sh*t happens..But since you wouldnt go paycheckless why threaten ruining a game people use to “get away” from their daily struggles…
Now that the reg refs are back,
**Now Finally teams can point their fingers at THEMSELVES**

]]>By: markaaron2012http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2031581
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 23:59:09 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2031581No whining! I agree you were pawns, but the argument that if you didn’t do it, someone else would doesn’t hold water with me. You saw a chance to make a buck and you took it. Simple as that. Why don’t you thank your lucky stars that you got to be on the field with these guys for a little while? Did you really have to subject yourself to being a “pawn”? I really doubt it. Absolutely ZERO sympathy from this fan. I am glad you got the chance, and I know Jerry Jones was being an a$$, but you chose to be party to it. Suck it up and be a man!
]]>By: eepobeehttp://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2031574
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 23:54:01 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2031574jrmbadger says:

The call was wrong. From the point that both players lept, Jennings had control with BOTH hands and pinned it to his chest.

I have still photos of both half way down to the ground where Tate’s arm is not even close to the ball while Jennings has both hands on it and its pinned to his chest. And if you think having one arm on the ball when the other player has two arms and is pinning it to his chest is somehow control – you are ridiculous.

Enjoy what will be forever known as the “golden taint” or the “seattle screw” – take your pick.

Seahawks 2-1 *
===========================

i have a pic of tate’s hands on the ball first. also, under what set of criteria is having the ball “pinned” to your chest more “controlled”? if you look at the definition of a catch, you’ll see feet have to be on the ground inbounds. tate’s feet were on the ground first too. so tate had his hands on the ball first and his feet were on the ground first; how is this an interception exactly? are you saying tate didnt’ catch the ball?

]]>By: richc111http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2031569
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 23:52:08 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2031569Hey Stan , A little bit of a raise!!!!! Their salariy will increase by 50K over the next 8 years. What do you do for a living work on Wall Street! Answer me this , why should the Ref’s or the players for that matter get raises because the league is generating more revenue?. I ask you, where do you work? If they grow REVENUE , do you get a raise? I can say in almost 100% of the case the answer is no!. So why does the fact the revenue growing make their jobs worth more? Are they doing a better job? So Stan what exactly do you propose. Anytime a Union wants something give it to them? Because that is what it sounds like you are saying. Answer me this question Stan. Why do the Ref need a Union. Are they under compensated for their work?. Are the poor working conditions? If the issue was the pension, why did they get a huge raise (note not a “little bit of a raise”) plus you name me 1 other job that you get a pension for working a part time seasonal job. Mark my words the next time this happens in 8 years the NFL will pull out the hat a whole bunch of trained replacement. That is how things work in business.
]]>By: roadtrip3500http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2031561
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 23:47:23 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2031561stanklepoot says: Sep 28, 2012 7:11 PM

Btw, the real refs haven’t made as many bad decisions as people say they have. Too many people fail to differentiate between bad calls and unpopular calls. I’ve heard and read all kinds of complaining when the officials correctly call rules that fans don’t like. The Tuck rule and the defenseless receiver rule (to the extreme degree it seems to go sometimes) might not be popular, but it’s the officials job to call them nonetheless.
——————————
The real refs’ frequent bad calls are the reason why we have the replay review system, which is not only updated annually as to what can be reviewed, but now has mandatory reviews of all scoring plays and turnovers. If they were so great, it wouldn’t have ever been necessary.

Once upon a time, there was an inferior football website run by a couple of part time hacks…they weren’t even part time journalists. But, it got better over time and as usual in life, if you throw enough crap at the wall, something sticks.

Give the replacements a break…they kept the machine running because both the regular (and sometimes just as incompetent) refs and owners were being too greedy. They did their job as best they could and I am happy we had games to watch.
________________________________
I’m sorry, but I have big problems with three of these statements.

1. You simply can’t compare the replacements to the real refs. Have the real refs made some bad calls? Of course, they’re human after all. The real problem with the replacements wasn’t simply bad calls (although there were quite a few), it was that all too often they hesitated to make calls or were too intimidated by the players, coaches, and fans. Say what you want about the real refs, but they don’t get intimidated easily.

Btw, the real refs haven’t made as many bad decisions as people say they have. Too many people fail to differentiate between bad calls and unpopular calls. I’ve heard and read all kinds of complaining when the officials correctly call rules that fans don’t like. The Tuck rule and the defenseless receiver rule (to the extreme degree it seems to go sometimes) might not be popular, but it’s the officials job to call them nonetheless.

2. The replacement refs did not “keep the machine running”. Do you really think the owners would have given up all that revenue due to a dispute over a few million dollars? No way. If the league had not been able to put together a crew of replacement refs, a deal would have been reached much earlier.

3. Exactly how were the refs being greedy? The big stumbling point for negotiations was the pension plan. How is it being greedy to want to keep something you’d been guaranteed to have for years?

No, in this case the owners were the aggressors plain and simple. While their revenue is increasing, they wanted to cut their contribution to the refs’ retirement fund. The league wanted to bring in some full time refs and “increase the bench”, but they weren’t willing to pay for these new employees. They expected the refs to accept these new employees, despite the fact that their salaries would come out of the same unchanged pool of money their salaries came out of.

So, what was the final result? Even after all hell rained down on the league, the refs were still willing to compromise. The refs keep their pension plan for the next 5 years, then it rolls over to a 401k style retirement plan. The league will get their deep bench over time (they will be trained and brought along by the NFLRA until they’re ready for full membership), but the league will pay for these new employees. The refs will get a little bit of a raise, but their salaries will rise at a much lower rate than the league’s increase in revenue will.

All in all, this is a deal the refs would have signed in the preseason. It’s is deal in which both sides made compromises. Unfortunately, it took the extremely poor performance of the replacements, and the ire of the fans, league partners, and even the President before the league was will to make this deal. Why? Because the owners have been feeling all powerful lately. They think they can simply make demands of everyone, and others have no choice but to comply. Ironically, the owners were outdone this time by the very thing people said sarcastically during the lockout of the players: the Refs had real jobs.

]]>By: mgdsquiggy17http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2031485
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 22:57:11 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2031485Was anyone else hoping the Browns would score on the last second hail mary after the personal foul penalty last night? That would have been fantastic to see the Ravens crowd reaction after they gave them a standing ovation.
]]>By: mgdsquiggy17http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2031478
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 22:53:44 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2031478“Nope – you were sacrifices, pawns have a chance. You guys were toast from the get go.”

Yep and the media and blogs like this were going to make sure that was the case. They had already decided before they even stepped foot on the field.

Anyone who calls these guys scabs are losers! The only thing that makes people call them scabs is because the word Union is involved. If the word Union wasn’t associated with the group all the regular ref’s would have been was a bunch of greedy rich guys but for some reason your in a union and you immediately become the victim. A victim that makes 150-200K plus benefits for working a season part time job!
____________________________
I think you miss the whole point of using a derogatory word like scab. Of course it’s only used when unions are involved, because that’s the only time that you have serious negotiations between labor and ownership. When there’s no union, ownership simply states the way things are going to be (provided it falls within the nation’s labor laws). Scabs are referred to in a derogatory tone because they are workers who undercut other workers’ ability to negotiate the best possible deal with ownership. In other words, they’re hurting their own kind for nothing more than a moderate short-term gain. Even the owners have no real respect for them. Once a deal is reached with the union, owners toss them out like garbage. The same is true in pretty much every industry.

]]>By: skolvikesskolhttp://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2031443
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 22:33:17 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2031443No one seems to acknowledge that the league had regular refs and representatives in the booth and at the stadiums. They seemed to basically agree with most calls that were made on the field and never stepped in to help or correct the officials. Ya think they were hanging these guys out to dry? I do.
]]>By: packerman1968http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2031421
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 22:21:29 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2031421Hopefully some of these guys and gal, get a chance at training and at a shot at the taxi squad.
]]>By: saintswillwinhttp://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2031415
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 22:19:06 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2031415Let them officiate the Pro Bowl!

No one will care if they blow that game!

]]>By: richc111http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2031414
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 22:18:45 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2031414Anyone who calls these guys scabs are losers! The only thing that makes people call them scabs is because the word Union is involved. If the word Union wasn’t associated with the group all the regular ref’s would have been was a bunch of greedy rich guys but for some reason your in a union and you immediately become the victim. A victim that makes 150-200K plus benefits for working a season part time job!
]]>By: ytsejamer1http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2031398
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 22:12:31 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2031398Once upon a time, there was an inferior football website run by a couple of part time hacks…they weren’t even part time journalists. But, it got better over time and as usual in life, if you throw enough crap at the wall, something sticks.

Give the replacements a break…they kept the machine running because both the regular (and sometimes just as incompetent) refs and owners were being too greedy. They did their job as best they could and I am happy we had games to watch.

]]>By: bigdingyguyhttp://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2031375
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 22:02:09 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2031375Honestly, I think we should all be thanking the “replacement refs”. They sacrificed themselves to the wrath of the fans, so we could all enjoy an NFL season. Kind of like a collective Jesus Christ… Of football.
]]>By: gdubludhttp://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2031333
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 21:33:32 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2031333Ummm…. Duh!
]]>By: rpiotr01http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2031315
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 21:22:50 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2031315There were one or two crews that I thought did a really good job and are worthy of being real NFL refs. One in particular, the guys who did the opening game NYG-DAL. With a little more experience they’d do just fine, just need to get used to the speed of the game and work on making sure things stay in rhythm. The rest showed why they never made it to the D1 level.
]]>By: roadtrip3500http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2031314
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 21:22:00 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2031314For all the claims the NFLRA can make about their staffing practices (blacks, Hispanics, etc.), the fact remains that the first female official in the NFL (Shannon Eastin) was a replacement. And with all the bad calls made by the replacements, I didn’t hear any mention of Ms. Eastin’s lack of competency at line judge for the first three weeks.

If the NFLRA wanted to show some class, they should allow the NFL to hire her as one of the new taxi squad members.

]]>By: getyourownnamehttp://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2031306
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 21:16:47 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2031306I’m sure the replacement refs are basically good people, but you are only a pawn if you are forced to do something you don’t want to do, or if the ultimate outcome is being hidden from you.

I give them credit for helping make sure there was still a game for the NFLRA refs to come back to. That said, that’s all they were ever there for. Does this mean these guys will never have a shot at joining the union and the NFL?
___________________________________
No chance in hell. The NFL is a union shop, and unions hate scabs more than anything. The NFLRA would quite simply not accept their presence in the league, and the league will not go out of its way to anger the NFLRA now that they’ve established labor peace for the next 8 years at least. They’ll want to bring in new refs, but they can recruit them from elsewhere. Division 1 refs will be available since we’re talking about full time jobs, as opposed to short-term jobs that would have cost them their full time jobs with the NCAA.

They are absolutely correct, that is why they choose this group and would not allow the division 1 refs.
_______________________________
You’ve got in backwards there. It was the division 1 schools that refused to allow the NFL to poach their refs. The last time this happened, the NFL actually hired division 1 refs. While not as good as the regular refs (due to different rules and speed of the game), they were a whole lot better than these replacements were. So, had the league been able to use them, they would have as it would have improved their negotiating position.

Problem is, this means less time for the division 1 refs to prepare for the division 1 college games. So, after the last time this happened, they passed a rule that said refs could not work for them and moonlight for the NFL during a lockout. Since they know it would only be short-term work, no division 1 ref will give up his job to work for the NFL during a lockout.

]]>By: kingpelhttp://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2031283
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 21:08:04 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2031283Oh thank god. Now we have the regular refs back and will never have to endure another mistake or bad call again! Yeeeeeeeeah!
]]>By: brady100http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/28/replacement-ref-we-were-pawns-in-a-business-deal/#comment-2031280
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 21:06:30 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=1335151#comment-2031280Mongo is just pawn in game of life.
]]>